« Saturday in Paris ..... Observations by Fred | Main | Anti-Trump Recruiting? »

06 June 2016

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Babak Makkinejad

That is fine but can either of these gentlemen (one would hope) agree to refrain from ad hominem attacks as a condition of reinstatement?

Some expression of contrition perhaps?

Pete Deer

Pat,
As you have so often mentioned this is your blog and you have every right to police those who post here. On more than one occasion you've compared the conversation of this committee of correspondence to being invited into your house. Frank discussions about controversial subjects or alternative, even unpopular points of view are encouraged but not at the expense of courtesy and good manners. It is among one of the reasons I come to this place.
I personally found Tyler's postings not only shrill but needlessly insulting and childish, to the point of not wanting to participate on an otherwise insightful and informative blog. For the record I hope he is not kept off for long but I do hope he finds some way to make his comentary less incendiary while remaining true to his beliefs.

Pete Deer

turcopolier

Pete Deer

"you've compared the conversation of this committee of correspondence to being invited into your house." I have not said that. Others here have said that. pl

Pete Deer

Pat,
I stand corrected. However, it is a sentiment I try to adhere to.

Pete

Daniel

Pat Lang

Thanks for enforcing this. I am one reader who would frequently cringe at those attacks, and appreciate your bringing renewed order into the house. The discussion here is valuable, maybe unique on the internet, so should not be allowed to decay.

elkern

Having been on the receiving end of Tyler's venom too often, all I can say is "good riddance". No other contributor to this Committee of Correspondence uses personal abuse so regularly. I abandoned all attempts at reasoned discourse with him years ago.

As the kids would write, DFTT.

IIRC, this is not the first time Tyler has earned a time-out. Col Lang, do you have a three-strikes-you're-out policy?

The Twisted Genius

Pete Deer,

I'm the one who made the analogy about being in ColonelLang's living room. I did that three years ago. The colonel would never be so pompous as to do that. As an outsider, I chose to revel in that particular act of pomposity. But I stand by what I said.

http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2013/06/the-nicest-sense-of-personal-honor-ttg.html

LeeG

Thanks, Tyler's personal attacks were going off the rails

jld

I find it a bit strange that so many Tyler bashers are showing late to the party while earliest comments were somehow balanced.

K

"Those who have read Tyler since he started commenting know that he is very intelligent, very perceptive and writes very well. In my view he says nothing that isn't true, and his radicalization comes from the fact that he has to deal with the excesses resulting from the general anti white Obama policies in a daily basis."

My sense of Tyler is that he is an ordinary white-skinned English-only Texan: a relatively recent immigrant from another part of the country whose family moved there because of the oil and real-estate boom in the 80s (and thus lack any actual roots in the land or culture), completely lacking any understanding, appreciation, or knowledge of history (whether locally, nationally, or globally), dismissive of how violent oppression affects communities and individuals, radicalized by years of right-wing lies from the "Whites Only" social/political circles in that region, in denial about how abusive "Whites Only" political/economic/legal/enforcement policies have empowered him relative to colored people, obstinately hostile to any scientific evidence that doesn't support views that would maintain and expand his relative empowerment and privilege to colored people, embittered that his empowerment relative to colored people is slowly being eroded as his economic inequality relative to white elites is steadily magnified, prone to blaming colored people (especially Spanish speakers)for his steadily expanding poverty relative to white elites, and largely lacking any grip at all on how fundamental economic and legal causes-and-effects work - mostly because he can't conceive of anyone who isn't white as deserving the same respect and value he gives to other white people.

And i say that as a white-skinned Texan whose ancestors lived in that region for thousands of years: i've met his sort many, many times. They are abundant in that region, and represent most of what most people in the world despise about Texas.

I can personally testify that nearly all of what he says about "immigrants" (read: Spanish or Spanish-English speakers, but before "Mexicans" there were always others: Vietnamese, "Blacks", etc) is categorically false and inaccurate. I have worked closely with such people and they have always been among the most diligent, cooperative, and skilled people i have known; but of course they are the original inhabitants of that land (Tejas, originally - not Texas), they are Catholic, they speak a different language, they have close ties to the land and indigenous peoples, and they generally maintain close ties to their extended family, so that makes them seem quite threatening to protestant white people whose blue-collar parents moved down to Texas as they fled the fading Rust Belt back during the 80s and 90s.

turcopolier

k

"My sense of Tyler is that he is an ordinary white-skinned English-only Texan: a relatively recent immigrant from another part of the country whose family moved there because of the oil and real-estate boom in the 80s (and thus lack any actual roots in the land or culture), completely lacking any understanding, appreciation, or knowledge of history (whether locally, nationally, or globally), dismissive of how violent oppression affects communities and individuals, radicalized by years of right-wing lies from the "Whites Only" social/political circles in that region, in denial about how abusive "Whites Only"" From what I know of Tyler I think you have mischaracterized him and I am going to let him out of the penalty box at least temporarily so that he can respond to your description of him. pl

David Habakkuk

Fred, kao_hsien_chih, Jack,

The caravan is moving on, but I have been pondering your comments (a lot to think about.)

The reference to Ortega’s work made me think again about an interesting man called Christopher Lasch, who published in 1995 a book entitled ‘The Revolt of the Elites.’ I have not read it, any more than Ortega, but did read an earlier book he wrote entitled ‘The True and Only Heaven: Progress and Its Critics.’

From a piece on Lasch which appeared in March 2013 on a British site called ‘Spiked-Online.’

“Before his tragic death from cancer (at the young age of 61), Lasch worked on The Revolt of the Elites. Here he elaborated on prior arguments, with a focus on an angle that had preoccupied him his entire career: the exposure of elitism. He particularly called out liberals, saying that their condescension towards the values of ‘Middle America’ created a space for Republicans to appear on the side of the masses. Liberalism had ‘no particularly solid and rooted constituency outside of the rootless professional class’ and lacked a vision of society, he said. That meant ‘the ascendancy of the new class rests not on its secure command of an intellectual and political tradition, but on its imagined superiority to the average unenlightened American bigot’. Lasch argued that today’s liberal elites have ‘the vices of the aristocracy without its virtues’.”

(See http://www.spiked-online.com/review_of_books/article/13398#.V1l_l7srLng .)

As so often, writers do not need to be, as it were, swallowed whole.

However, I do think that Lasch hit quite a large number of nails on the head. Among other things, ‘the vices of the aristocracy without its virtues’ seems to me an absolutely apt description of, among other, Bill and Hilary Clinton, and Tony and Cherie Blair.

An interesting puzzle is why figures like David Cameron, George Osborne, and Boris Johnson, whose backgrounds are much closer to being ‘aristocratic’, are so similar to the Clintons and Blairs.

Another point which I think Lasch brings out is that while the terms ‘left’ and ‘right’ work some of the time, at other times they really can obfuscate and stop people talking to each other.

In particular, when it comes to the ‘invade the world, invite the world’ approach, which in my view is at the heart of our current problems, this is really not a simple left-right issue. Moreover, contrary to what the Clintons may think, the belief that ‘multiculturalism’ has run amuck is emphatically not restricted to a kind of bigoted ‘underclass’ which is ultimately politically insignificant.

Precisely because of that, I think a great deal of what Tyler says – among other things, his blunt descriptions of the realities of control, or lack of it, on the border with Mexico – should be of interest to very many people who would violently disagree with him on many things.

I think that more people would be in a position to learn from what he has to say if he sometimes kept his temper, and the ‘hooligan streak’ which I actually rather like, under better control.

optimax

K

Tyler does not even live in Texas. Your premise is off by two states.

elkern

jld -

I didn't want to waste time rehashing my experience with Tyler's lack of manners, so I held off on commenting. But I was dismayed to see so many voices here supporting him (comments dated before mine ran roughly 2-to-1 supporting him, by my count). Anonymous's post (which I read as "it's OK for Tyler to talk nasty because I agree with him") pushed me over the edge.

Democracy cannot survive without some mutual respect among citizens, and Tyler's posts have rarely exhibited any respect for those of us with different perspective. No other commenter here has a similar record of personal attacks.

Like several commenters above, I come here for different perspectives on what's happening in our world (as well as cutting-edge info on foreign policy). Modern technology (Internet, 900-channel cable TV) has led too many people to gather info only from sources which reinforce their ideas, and converse only with people who share their perspective. That's a dead end.

I heartily embrace TTG's formula for civility here ("Col Lang's living room").

Maybe I'm just an old prude.

K

I thought you might. ;-) I'm curious to hear what he has to say, as well.

I do hope both you and he note that most of what i talked about was "Whites Only rhetoric" - and his faith in that.

The color of his skin and his linguistic capabilities are a relatively small part of my estimation of him. Growing up in Texas, i met quite a few "Whites Only" Spanish speakers and former slaves, as well.

They are complicit, by no means independent, and my comments about their awareness of history would be either much more cutting, or doubled - depending on their personal circumstances
.

K

For my part, Tyler and I have had a tense relationship for many years. Lately, i do give him credit: i have felt his opinions and observations have matured, somewhat, but i have also resented in him what i perceive - perhaps wrongly - to be a sense of "I served in the military, so i deserve a louder voice regardless of the issue."

I have certainly discovered in him that particularly British affliction, the profound disgust with anyone who claims to live or have rights "from the land" but is not from Britain - and that is something i will not ever compromise upon.

There are many, many, many men and women in Texas who believe that, and many of those are in the police force. They will challenge you with that sort of talk while holding a firearm at their side, as they bicker with you over the sorts of vegetation growing along the lot-lines.

I respect people who have served in the military, but I also expect them to respect those of us who did not approve nor promote the wars they fought in. I know that's very, very difficult for young soldiers, but that doesn't make it any easier to deal with their inclination to use battlefield rhetoric against people they perceive as public opponents.

Lastly, i check this blog when i can. When i have free time and choose to read the news, it is a daily (or hourly, if the conversation is good) destination.

I have not had much free time, lately. I was slow to catch the news.


Tyler

K,

What the hell are you talking about? I'm an East Coaster who moved to Arizona, to begin with. The rest of your analysis is so ridiculous and rote it sounds like you got it off a HuffPaint article generator.

Here's the thing with your pop psycho-analysis BS: It reveals the inability of you and the rest of the (((Fifth Columnists))) here to think outside your paradigm. You can't visualize why someone might think different than what you do, because your spun sugar narrative can't handle things like "IQ is genetic" or "Men are born men and women are born women" so you invent these models that only exist inside your head like "race is a social construct" or "genderbread man" (google it). Cute little sound bites that allow you to moral signal to other white goodthinkers that you are a goodthinker and oh so virtuous.

With your basic inability to grasp facts exposed, the rest of your essay - based off of Magic Dirt theory that never seems to exist reality, is exposed as a fraud. Maybe you're a Texan? Maybe you're even white? I don't know. I wouldn't be surprised if you were another self flagellating white who gets off on his racial masochism.

However reality doesn't care about your moral signaling BS and all the outliers you try to hold up and shout "See! See!" when all one has to do is 1) look at what is happening across the nation and 2) see how white goodthinkers like yourself ACT vs. What you say (self segregating yourself in ultra white/Asian zip codes while claiming you love minorities). This is why Emperor Trump (PBUH)continues to rise and your desperation is more apparent as we get closer to November.

The thing is I am always right in regards to you and the rest of the leftist idiots on here (elkern, dubaltach, ulenspiegel GCP, edward amenes, laura, nancy k, will reks, OTHERS) who constantly spew the same prog talking points over and over again and are immune to the concentrated facts I have to lay at your feet while I watch you dig yourself into the sand further so you don't commit crime think.

When I mock you and your ilk as you all so richly deserve, its because I am tired of having to listen to your idiotic drivel, having to scroll past the tiresome nonsense you claim to believe while you live an entirely different way, your worldview so twisted you can't even say men should stay out of women's bathrooms. When I see elkern and dubaltach cry about me being mean, it is absolutely glorious because it further reinforces my worldview that they are mental midgets who have nothing to discuss because they can't even handle my rhetoric, let alone engage in the dialectic about world spanning issues. Even with my splenic venting, people still appreciate what I say because they know I speak from a place of knowledge. These two (and others!) could leave tomorrow, never come back and the only thing people would notice would that the quality of commentary has improved drastically

I'll take my time in the penalty box because its worth it so you know absolutely how low I think of you prog cucks whenever I have to waste my time scrolling past your babble to read the words of intellectual GIANTS like Habakkuk, Brenner , Ali, and all the rest who I see striding across this landscape like Titans and am so fortunate to learn from. I'd no sooner go after them like I do some of you then I would attack a tank with a rock because they are men who speak with authority, while you leftist shills are nothing but meat that can make words.

"Anonymous" above has it dead to rights correct. We are indeed at war with each other, I'm just open about it.

Okay, back to the Island of Misfit Toys with me. Thank you Colonel Lang for the opportunity to engage once again.

Anonymous

Col Lang, I plead you allow Tyler one comment per post, free of constraints, so he is not tempted to answer to all the points that distress him, but focus on some important matter.

I disagree with your characterization of Tyler regarding the "right-wing lies", because he has a very similar viewpoint to mine and I'm a brazilian, that is, someone who comes from a country that liberal America aspires to become, and I come from a completelly different worldview.

As for GCP, the right thing to do is to be magnanimous and impartial. Even handed, I'd say. I mean let us hang him from his pair of scrawny hands, let him dry an make a rug out of his piratic skin. As he is an agitator, what about banning him from posts about internal american affairs and watch him squirm?

Oh, let them be gentlemen and agree to speak one comment per post for a while, but not ban. Let the belonging to the Most Noble Order of The Banned be something the likes of LeaNder and me could bragg about and, you know, mumble about, mumble about, mumble about... You keep Tyler and GCP, we keep our lamentation rights!

Anonymous

By the gods!!! I don't know how, but I missed the quotes in your comment, Col. Lang! Apologies. It was complete misfire.

Babak Makkinejad

Tyler:

During the period of exile and contrition, you may find reading this site informative - if not amusing:

http://www.martin-van-creveld.com/

turcopolier

All

I am going to let both of them out and then wait to see what happens. pl

Fred

K,

You met former slaves? Where were they from since there aren't any 150 year old people alive on this planet.

David Habakkuk

K,

Perhaps you can now tell us where you come from, and where you have lived.

You invented a biography for Tyler which, as quite a few of us could have told you, had no relation to reality.

And you now tell us that:

“I have certainly discovered in him that particularly British affliction, the profound disgust with anyone who claims to live or have rights "from the land" but is not from Britain – and that is something i will not ever compromise upon.”

I must ask you – what is your experience of Britain? Are you British by origin? Were you born here? If now, when and where have you lived here?

Actually, as someone who is of mixed Welsh, English and Scottish ethnic origin, Southern English by upbringing, and, in a way, Anglo-Jewish by culture, I could discourse to you for a long time about the complexities of this country.

What you would find – here as elsewhere – is incredible diversity.

And certainly, one strand you will find is xenophobia.

However, if you think that xenophobia is distinctively British, I have to ask: what planet are you living on?

As it happens, both my wife’s parents and my father come from ‘port’ cultures: East End London in her case, Barry in South Glamorgan in mine.

Such a background takes people different ways. In both our cases, it means that we instinctively like immigrants, when they are people who want to settle here, and assimilate.

But, by the same token, I also have no difficulty whatsoever understanding the kind of anger which Tyler has so regularly expressed.

Certainly in this country, this is not simply a product of the kind of ‘nativist’ xenopobia to which you refer.

Going back to Enoch Powell’s time, it has a very great deal to do with a – very well justified – sense on the part of large elements of the indigenous population that crucial parts of what are actually ‘native’ élites have a complete disregard for their interests and a complete contempt for their culture.

Ironically, if you want a better understanding of Britain, I would recommend to you a piece recently posted by Philip Giraldi, under the title ‘The Bill and Hillary Show’.

(See http://www.unz.com/article/the-bill-and-hillary-show/ .)

It is the peculiar combination of condescension and a comprehensive reluctance to grasp that ‘multiculturalism’ really does have problems displayed by people like the Clintons and the Blairs which is largely responsible for the kind of shambles in which we now find ourselves.

My own view – but I am twice Tyler’s age – is that it would be much better if he expressed himself more temperately.

In part this is precisely because what he can report, out of direct experience, both in relation to what is actually happening along the border with Mexico, and as a sometime ‘mouthy grunt’ in Iraq and Afghanistan, might then find a wider audience.

But if one wants to defuse the angers which have been building up, insofar as that is possible, one needs first of all to grasp the long history that lies behind them.

Will Reks

Anonymous,

You should correct yourself of the notion that Americans, liberal or not, want the United States to be anything like Brazil, a third world nation with first world pretensions. Good luck with the Olympics and do invest in a good mosquito net.

Tyler

Jld,

Took them a while to come out from behind the bed and under their covers before they turned on the lights to make sure the big scary commenter wasn't going to wedgie them.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

July 2020

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 31  
Blog powered by Typepad