Rich putsch kitsch

As a lot of people are sounding off about Frank Rich's latest silly column, I thought I'd chime in.

I don't know whether he's trying to outdo himself in terms of pure buffoonery, but this time, Rich is hell-bent on proving that the conservatives who support Doug Hoffman in the NY-23 race are a bunch of "Stalinists." In a piece titled "The G.O.P. Stalinists Invade Upstate New York," he refers to a "riotous and bloody national G.O.P. civil war" and a "G.O.P. killing field." And later (after an embarrassing historical mismatch in which he refers to the "Hoffman putsch"), he claims conservatives are "re-enacting Stalinism in full purge mode."

It's easy to dismiss this as overwrought political hyperbole, which it is. But like a lot of hyperbole, every little bit adds more incrementally more damage to the ability to communicate. What is happening in NY-23 is democracy from in action and the political process at work. Voters like Doug Hoffman more than they like the dishonorable Dede Scozzafava, and (as appears most likely) more than they like Democrat Bill Owens. That they will elect Hoffman is the antithesis of Stalinism. Stalinism is state terrorism and murder -- directed from the top down. This is peaceful democracy from the ground up, against the tyranny at the top.

And while Frank Rich may not realize it, no one was killed. Despite the "riotous and bloody" civil war, not one single corpse lies on the killing fields of upstate New York.

Words and terms become useless when they're abused this way ("racism" is another example of a word which no longer means anything). My guess is that Rich (in addition to bashing conservatives) doesn't want Stalinism to mean anything.

Yet under Stalinism, more people were killed than under any other "ism" known to man. So, aside from being inaccurate, Rich's analogy trivializes mass murder on a grand scale.

All too easy for me to say. But I may be wrong, for the bloody Stalinist putsch will take place tomorrow, when Doug Hoffman stands poised seize power and murderously overthrow all of those democratically elected Czars.

Would it spoil Frank Rich's fun if I venture that no one will actually be killed?

posted by Eric on 11.02.09 at 04:18 PM





TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/8979






Comments

As I recall, the New York Times coverage implicitly supported Stalin's purges in the 1930s.

CN   ·  November 2, 2009 07:45 PM

The past twenty years have seen everything hyped to inane levels.
SARS, H1N1, so called worst recession in history,
Iraq war, Afghan war, Global warming, health care,
if all these minor problems are so severe I pity our population when a real problem must be dealt with.
Some of us have lived through WW11, Polio, Korean war etc. and cannot understand why all the fuss.

Hugh   ·  November 2, 2009 07:46 PM

You got it CN, it's funny how they won't return Duranty's Nobel for lying about how great Stain is and yet, they act as if Stalinism is a bad thing.

The thing is I don't see Stalinism working here, too many people are armed and willing to fight back and I really don't see our military firing on Americans.

I would expect to see at worst a civil war among our military as some units protect civilians against the ones who are attacking them and I would expect that not to happen or maybe just a few units support a Stalin against the rest of the military.

Veeshir   ·  November 3, 2009 07:11 AM

Post a comment

You may use basic HTML for formatting.





Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)


November 2009
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30          

ANCIENT (AND MODERN)
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR


Search the Site


E-mail



Classics To Go

Classical Values PDA Link



Archives



Recent Entries



Links



Site Credits