|
|
|
February 15, 2006
The plasticity of fascism and blowing things up . . .
My first reaction to Muslim persecution of the wholesome Ronald McDonald was shock and awe.  "Next, They Came for the Plastic Clowns" opined David Bernstein, joined by clown defender Glenn Reynolds. Can we get serious? I mean, shouldn't we be asking why the crowd is so upset at the clown? I didn't know what to think, and I was reduced to the status of a pitiful crybaby, asking questions like "Why do they hate us?" I figured that either all clowns are Un-Islamic, or else Ronald McDonald is un-Islamic, and un-Islamic Clowns are bad. Or both. Clearly we need to understand. There must be an explanation. A bit more research convinced me that there were other things leading up to this. Not long ago, there was this incident:
The link goes to stuff I don't understand, but which is obviously true. That's because people don't do these things without a reason! Don't clowns bring the bad karma down on themselves by doing things like this?  As professor (and out of politeness I won't call him "perfesser") Juan Cole observes, Nazi tactics like the above (also known as "eliminationist rhetoric") are not funny. No they're not! (Especially, I might add, when coupled with mutability of mobilizing passions.) The real issue, of course, is not whether a clown is plastic or not. It's what it does. And (as Mark Steyn revealed recently), some of the things that plastic clowns do are indeed shocking to contemplate.
"Hier klicken"? Is that fascist code talk for "Achtung baby"? While I'm all for freedom and everything, I hope things don't have to come to this: 
That definitely sounds like a religious affront -- as well as an affront to the senses. (For starters, relish doesn't belong on Egg McMuffins!) UPDATE (02/21/06): Via Maggies Farm, the mystery of who benefits the most from these attacks on Ronald McDonald appears to have been solved:
posted by Eric on 02.15.06 at 10:22 AM
Comments
Thanks Sean. I try to control myself, but from time to time I'm vulnerable to a Big Mac Attack.... Eric Scheie · February 15, 2006 01:09 PM Are you sure the Ronald McDonald Clown with the Magic Pad isn't funnny? It made me grin. Maybe Etch-a-Sketch was too difficult for him to use? LomaAlta · February 15, 2006 11:42 PM |
|
December 2006
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
December 2006
November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
• Holiday Blogging
• The right to be irrational? • I'm cool with the passion fashion • Climate change meltdown at the polls? • If you're wrong, then so is God? • Have a nice day, asshole! • Scarlet "R"? • Consuming power while empowering consumption • Shrinking is growth! • My dirty thoughts
Links
Site Credits
|
|
"That definitely sounds like a religious affront -- as well as an affront to the senses. (For starters, relish doesn't belong on Egg McMuffins!)"
Har-har, honey. Actually, one weird thing: I was brought up in a Sabbatarian Christian religion in which we followed the Levitical health laws. After becoming an apostate I had no compunction about eating pork and shellfish and stuff...but my stomach wasn't used to them, and I couldn't keep them down. So now I guess I abstain from pork for irreligious reasons.
Anyway, I was going to use a Big Mac there, but it didn't sound as offensive as something with ham. Might have gone better with the relish, though.
(Thanks for the link, BTW.)