Commenter Archive

Comments by CK MacLeod

On “You’re Welcome and Rightbackatcha

You're welcome and will do, Joe Sal - or anyway that's the hopeplan.

On “Neo-Imperialism and the 2016 Campaigns (Reply to Marchmaine)

Thanks for reading 'em. Motivated me to take another look as well. I still stand by the series.

I have a longish post on the ordinary wisdom regarding US "militarism" and "interventionism" that I've been sitting on, and re-working, since December. It extends the discussion of the Iron Law of Irony or the Cunning of History with which the East Ghouta series concludes. In short, I think the world makes the case as it were empirically for an America-centric neo-empire, or global neo-imperialism, which has to be distinguished from the older forms of imperialism, and is not the same as an American-national imperium extended over the brave new world and all the people in't. The analysis suggests to me that we may remain congenitally incapable of accepting the case except in authentic terror of the alternatives, effectively compelling us or the younger generation to replicate the experience, til kingdom come.

On “Roger’s Art

Hi, Dave! Last I checked, Roger didn't have his own email address - so stood as one of the last, possibly enviable holdouts on that score. Martin gave in a few years ago. Anyway, it's a good excuse to get in contact with them, so will do. Maybe it'll be motivation for Roger finally to get connected.

On “Why Discuss Anti-Modernist and Anti-Democratic Literature?

I don't see why the only two choices are between a peculiar hyper-racialism - different races as "essentially" of different species, with only the superior race qualifying as "human" - and egalitarianism. Many on the mainstream right place equality and individual liberty at the center of their thinking, especially the libertarian right, of course, but the place of those concepts may vary widely across the right and alt-right. The so-called "race realists," for example, believe that so-called racial types generally correspond to typical aptitudes or tendencies, but they usually concern themselves with implications for public policy, not with pre-judgments to be applied to individuals. I'm sure there are people still arguing like 19th Century slavery apologists, but I think a much more common attitude is that preference for "one's own kind," competition between ethnically defined groups, and identification of typical ethnic characteristics are normal and natural within and among human communities, and always have been. I'm not arguing in favor of this view. I'm just saying that one can hold it without presuming superiority or inferiority on some universal scale or with reference to a right to "dominate."

As for egalitarianism and libertarianism, many conservatives put both at the center of their thinking, but, obviously, differ with progressives, leftists, and others about the implications. Some more typical conservative and possibly a higher percentage of American alternative rightists seem open to the critique of ideologies of equality and freedom.


The A-R isn't "a" philosophy. What if many associated or associable with the A-R would firmly and consistently reject that characterization of their beliefs?


That would be the prudential justification, though it would still be a study under un-scientific or anti-philosophical presumptions that are also, arguably, illiberal ones. What if the only way to get the information or evidence or insight you need, practically, is to approach the subject without prejudice, or "ideally"?

On “Only the Right Believes in Class Conflict Anymore

I agree there are clearly parallels - and I briefly alluded to them with the final link in the piece to what turned out to be overwrought speculation regarding the rise of the National Front (not saying that story's over, but the FN didn't do as well in regional elections as some feared). However, there are also so many differences related to the different histories and structures of European political systems, composition of interest groups, vestiges of the workerist Left, the role of Europe in the global system, etc. In Europe the perception of a betrayal of the existing working class - and of national electorates - is also especially tied up with the project of the European Union. Too complex a topic for a short observational post like this one!

On “Testing Xpost – #2 – OTC Post at OT Xposted to CK Mac’s

Keeping this post here as archive, deleting OT-OTC post. Tentative conclusion is that tool is best used for easily sending a post. Comments and post updates initially a little too difficult to predict to recommend. After checking code will re-visit the question.


It did NOT.

So, so far only backposting of comments has been to CKMac's on posts originating at CKMac's and commented on at OT.

Oi - hard to keep straight, but that seems to be the case... so far.


Note, Origin blog post (OT-OTC) did xpost latest edits referring to non-transferral of comment on old thread and wondering whether this comment will backpost to OT-OTC. I'm guessing it will.


Post edits, but NOT comments, from origin blog (OT-OTC) appear at target blog. This functionality might even be desirable. Next will be curious to see if a) this comment gets xposted back to the origin blog's comment thread, and then, b) whether edits to this post at CK Mac's get xposted back.

Also still to test code-external

1) functionality between two simple single-site blogs
2) functionality with "crosspost comments" turned off
3) functionality if crosspost is turned on for a post after it has already been commented on

On “Testing Old Crosspost (Xpost) Plug-In

If the test is successful, then I'll see about synching between two "communicating" blogs.


I believe that the problem may have to do with non-adaptation or incomplete adaptation to multi-site environment. XPost sets up a general database rather than a blog-specific one. To complete the test - and to see if I can re-produce the old error - I'll have to add a second test post at OT, this time from the main blog.


OK - is quite possible to delete or restore comments at the target blog without affecting anything at this blog. That's probably for the best. Next will see about that database insertion problem.

1) see whether old references are still in the db
2) try again either at "sub-blog" or at main blog


Now have to see if the confusing one-wayitude is an effect of that database problem I mentioned.

Also of interest - whether comment moderation interferes with the desired functionality in some unexpected way.


Not immediately! And not with settings as previously set.


So, here's a comment - let's see if it syncs.

On “In This Galaxy, Now

Kolohe, I don't think the AltRight venerates SW IV. I'm not sure that the AltRight has a collective characteristic view of SW IV, or for that matter of mid-20th C fascism. I think what's clear is that the trend outlined or co-realized in the transition from Star Wars 1977 Style A (and all those photos) to the jumbly and multi-cultural gender-equitable present is a (simultaneously political, economic, cultural, historical, ideological, etc.) trend further against their preferences and ideas.

The difficulty of talking about the "significance" of this topic is evidenced in the first comment on Roland's thread and the treatment of the AltRight as a contagion requiring quarantine rather than as proponents of one view among others. I'm not proposing that we relax that quarantine or tighten it. I'm not sure it's even up for decision.


Right - I understand what the Russkies and for that matter the Western peace movement thought of "Star Wars." That's why they called it "Star Wars," and meant it derisively. The fact remains that SDI's - projected, imaginary - form was of a shield against Death Stars, not as a Death Star. In that indirectly offensive and imaginary form, rather than overtly and directly offensive and actual form, it may have, according to the historians, been more effective, which was fine for Ronald Skywalker in his successful long-odds battle against the Evil Empire. If true, that conclusion would undermine the "Reagan was a pre-Alzheimery stumbler-bumbler and his voters were idiots" narrative, and tends to support "he and they were either a lot smarter than credited, or the Force was with them, or both."


To bookend the more extended analysis, we'd also want to look at the political function of "Star Wars" during the Reagan years. As I'm sure you will recall, the term was attached derisively to the "SDI" program, as though the ridiculous would-be emperor, ex-actor Reagan, was building his own Death Star, mistaking science fiction for reality. Reagan was notoriously stubborn about SDI/Star Wars - his aides and allies had to grit their teeth when he insisted on pursuing it - but the ironies mount when one considers first the defensive design of the projected weapon system, second the fact that it was never built, and third that, whether or not Reagan was having difficulty distinguishing fact from fiction, his Soviet counterparts in the "Evil Empire" apparently took the threat seriously (in other words the fiction had a real effect).

By the time we get to Dick Cheney as Darth Vader, and fellow travelers playfully advocating for the Empire, we are dealing with a very peculiar moment in political culture.


[A]s a child watching them, I wanted to be Chewbacca or Admiral Akbar. While the films have their share of cartoonish racial stereotypes and monsters, the fact that these characters were desirable role models and individuals to pattern our actions on seem to put them at a higher social level than mere foils/friends for our white heroes. But perhaps that is simply my childlike mind at work.

Not sure how old you were, but to me they resemble, or evoke, the talking animals of a Disney or Warner Brothers or Hanna-Barbera etc. cartoon. (It wasn't until adulthood that I realized that Sweet Polly Purebred was another dog. As a small child, I heard "Pure bread," and I didn't find it odd at all that Underdog and she were romantically entwined!) In theory, regardless of whatever conscious attachments you formed, the fact remained that the type or heroic archetype embodied in Luke Skywalker was being imprinted on your mind anyway, as for many millions of others.


Wait a sec - you're saying that way back when, ca. 1968 or so, National Review did a Star Trek extravaganza? That might indeed be worth digging up.

As I was pondering this it occurred to me that we are now twice as far in years from Star Trek as Star Trek was from WWII. Roddenberry was kind of a McGovern figure - the bomber pilot who returned from the war with a vision of a world that wouldn't ever need/want/have bomber pilots again. I'd guess that NatRev of the time would have accused him of selling communism via a particularly naive form of "one worldism."


Thanks, Roland, and, yes, let's continue to walk down this dangerous if not hopelessly suicidal path, intellectually hand in hand...

However, I don't think of my response as a "retort," since to me the word tends to suggest a counterattack.


From the Featured Archives


Extraordinary Comments

CK's WP Plugins