Today’s Letter is “C” for Communist
Yesterday: I wrote a polite message to my representative, Marjorie Taylor Greene, on her website, urging her to support ongoing funding for NPR and PBS because “they model a saner mode of discourse that promotes the ongoing civic health of our fine republic.”
Also yesterday: Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene accused NPR and PBS of having a “communist agenda,” of being “one of the founders of the trans child abuse industry,” and of “sexualizing and grooming children.”
Also yesterday: Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene told a journalist from the UK, “We don’t give a crap about your opinion and your reporting. Why don’t you go back to your country?”
I cannot pretend I’m overly confident that my representative will find my commendation of sane discourse especially persuasive.
Two quick addendums:
First, plenty of public-spirited and principled people hold that the federal government has no business funding media sources when so many alternatives exist. Plus, others argue, any fair construction of the Constitution suggests that media funding falls outside the federal government’s proper scope. These are not unreasonable arguments, and they deserve our consideration even though I finally do not find them ultimately persuasive. My point in this salty little post falls under the umbrella of commentary on the state of our civic discourse rather than whether the Constitution cannot abide funding Elmo.
Second, MTG’s website imposes a 500-character limit on constituent messages. Characters, not words. For context, this very brief post has well over 1,500 characters. This may be standard for our nation’s representatives’ websites; I can’t be sure. Regardless, 500 characters is far too little space to convey one’s thoughts meaningfully. I’m quite sure I’ve had pre-coffee morning yawns of over 500 characters. Clearly, the purpose of MTG’s comment section is not to engage with constituents’ reasoning but simply to register a binary opinion—yes or no. Because that’s the world we choose to live in at the moment.
Tragic that you f’ing yourself living in the district that re-elected Empty G by resounding margins.
OK, but is tomorrow’s letter “H” for Hot Wheels?
@Fortune: That’s the saddest excuse for “whataboutism” I’ve ever seen. Such a sad little MAGAt child.
I assume that the comments are visible to others so MTG really doesnt want other people reading cogent comments or even presenting evidence she is wrong? Anyway, It still occasionally strikes me how much conservatives seem to love it when their leaders are nasty and outright A-holes.
Steve
@Daryl: It doesn’t even make sense, so there’s that!
@Daryl: Michael and I debate who has the worst member of Congress. With Senator Tuberville, I no doubt have the dumbest. But MTG is the most malicious.
The resurrection of the word “communist” as a derogatory smear is another sureal aspect of the reactionary right.
Junkyard dogs like Pat Buchanan and Newt Gingrich never let go of this abusive epithet, despite the expiration of the Soviet Union and the embrace of consumerism by China. But a whole younger cadre of rightwing activists, the likes of Charlie Kirk, Enrique Tarrio, et al, have repurposed the term for their agitiprop, ensnaring the uninformed despite the word’s irrelevance to today’s world, devoid of its original meaning, history, and usage. It allows them to vilify with the economy of a single word.
MTG is just purely ignorant and a thoroughly contentious personality. To her, “communist” is just another rock to pick up and throw, as she performs dumbed down bidding for the oligarch class.
MTG and her cohort have no clue as to what would constitute an actual “communist agenda.” Nor do they understand (nor care to understand) the myriad of interconnected elements necessary for the functional social compact required of large scale, complex civilization.
It might be said, these people are “communist” (word) dupes.
@Steven L. Taylor:
Yes, but Tuberville actually lives in FL, so you have that going for you, which is nice!!!
(With apologies to Carl Spackler.)
@Rob1:
The communist smear is extra comical when you consider how MAGA is cozying up to both Russia and China.
@Fortune: I thought cutsey derogatory nicknames were okay now. Or is that only reserved for your orange god-king?
Go cry in the corner about it
Love how maga hates it when their nonsense is turned back on them.
@Daryl:
And Trump has been affectionate towards his pal Lil’ Rocketman Kim Jong Un.
So who’s left? The big scary threat presented by Laos and Cuba? America’s shaking in its boots all the way down the aisles of Walmart and over to BurgerKing to have it their way!
I give you Wiki’s answer to the query: What makes a country communist?
Hmmm. A full-on oligarchy in control of government could pretty much have the same effect, minus the no “capitalism” component — although, China and Vietnam seem to have mastered the use of capital.
– By beggaring the working classes, private property becomes more “dream” than reality.
– State control of economic activity: tariffs being the obvious reference, but aside from that, the neo-Republicans are as much about using the state to “pick winners” as any prior party.
– State control of the media. It’s happening.
– Restrictions on freedoms of religion. All hail our ascending theocratic moment! Freedom of religious expression means freedom from religious expression and choice of expression. Amen.
– Suppression of dissent and opposition. It’s happening.
Communism? MAGA-ism? What’s in a name. Oppression is oppression by any name.
@Steven L. Taylor:
That person doesn’t have senses in the sense that the rest of us have senses we use to make sense of others’ sense.
—
Crockett is better at pretty much everything worthwhile than MTG. The former may wear fake eyelashes, but that accessory is far more real than MTG’s contrived persona.
Fortune, I’m glad the insult of the Texas governor got under your skin. Keep crying, baby boy.
It’s not shocking to see Republicans think they’re entitled to be the only ones who spit out insults.
Get over it. After all, it’s just a joke, right?
I thought Republicans were supposed to be the ones who didn’t need safe spaces.
Fortune, how weak of a person did your parents raise you to be? Why are you so sensitive?
@Thomm: I don’t support Trump, one of the worst things about him is his thin skin, I hate the degradation of politics on both sides. I don’t call people names.
Guys, you have every reason to be angry. I’m angry.
AND, it is a primary goal of the Internet Research Agency to foment unrest and division within the US.
Also, getting angry with trolls is kind of a weak substitute for getting angry with the fools and grifters who are currently wrecking the country and making everyone miserable. People such as MTG (and I don’t consider her a fool, I think she’s a grifter.)
I don’t know what to do about it, but I think it’s something we need to keep in mind.
I know this is terribly petty, but MTG has the worst-looking arms I’ve ever seen. Why does she insist on displaying them?
@Fortune:
You don’t support Trump?
Lol.
Are you now posting as a parody account?
@Fortune:
I wouldn’t insult anyone either if I was as ugly as you.
@Fortune:
Go on, say it – H is for Hillary’s Emails – you wanted to but you didn’t want to risk being canceled.
In today’s political environment, the word “communist” is just one variety of conservative insult, sort of like the word “libtard.” Or, coming from the other direction, the words “fascists”or “Nazi”. Sure, some people truly are communists, or fascists, or Nazis, but in the vast majority of circumstances, these are just insults, not accurate descriptors.
On an unrelated point, I know a young woman who fancies herself to be a communist. So I quoted the communist manifesto to her, and she looked at me blankly. I then handed her my copy and said “if you’re going to be a communist, at least be familiar with the communist manifesto.”
All of which goes to show that the vast majority of Americans have no idea what constitutes communism or fascism.
@Daryl: Fortune has always said they don’t support Trump. Carry water? Yes. Have 99% aligned views (even when at odds with previously-asserted views)? Yes. Defend whenever possible? Yes. Blatantly avoid criticism of? Yes. Whatabout whenever possible? Yes.
But not support, nononono.
@ptfe:
Such as?
@Steven L. Taylor:
You may have a better historical grasp of this, but seriously, has there ever been a time in our country’s history that a comparable level of collected “ignorance” has populated our halls of Congress? (And of course, I’m talking about the “conservative” party here). Such assessment, if possible, needs to be relative to the times and general access to education and information.
MTG, Tuberville, Paul Gosar, Louie Gohmert, Boebert, Anna Luna, Ron Johnson, and others, including those who electively project ignorance into public discourse despite backgrounds that might suggest otherwise.
We should have seen the arc of this trending ignorance coming when we invaded Iraq for no good reason setting off a cascade of geopolitical disasters. GWB set the mark for these times.
@Rob Robinson:
Qualified agreement on this. I accept your story is likely true. But I don’t think that young woman is all that different from anyone else.
The question of what constitutes Communism is far more complex than knowing what is written in The Communist Manifesto or even Das Kapital. It’s no different from defining Capitalism as what Adam Smith wrote. Broadening it to philosophy as a whole, the same thing is true with the immediate descendants of Hegel.
Shortly: defining one’s political/philosophical identity as Capitalist or Communist or Hegelian gives, at most, vague information. It may be useful information in that it gives one a sense of an interlocutor’s general stance about some things, but not much more in most cases. Keep this in mind when you reach the end of this post.
These categories have become so broad that they are not only meaningless, but internally incoherent. “The West” and “Western Civilization” has been discussed here in the same context. None of those terms are meaningless in a technical sense, but popular politics does not function on that technical plane.
Moreover, it should be obvious that any philosophical or theoretical system that commands attention from scholars and the public will undergo a series of developments over time. Some of those will be good faith refinements; some of those will be bad faith bastardizations.
For regular people, it isn’t necessarily good or bad faith, but a heuristic as defined by individuals perceived to be in some sort of alignment with one’s own worldview.
The United States has a population of more than 300 million people. The vast majority of whom defines their political identity on one of a couple binary choices. One may vote straight-ticket GOP but be pro-choice and anti-death penalty.
Even those who attempt to explicitly reject those binaries are still, at least, defined by (not being) one of those identities, if not defined by a self-(mis)conception about rational process. Indeed, self-ID Independents, by and large, vote for one party or the other. A centrist or moderate label tells us little about any specific issue. Those self-definitions have little relation actual political philosophy. Or: an attempt to signal reasonability as a virtue—a vacuous expression of independent thought.
Hell, people who favor protecting or expanding social security will vote for candidates who seek to cut SS benefits, spend the next two or four or six years complaining about their representative, then vote for the same candidate in the next election instead of the opponent who pledges to maintain or increase those payments! It may be a rational choice depending on how they rank the importance of issues.
But in terms of politics, a lot of people eat a piece of cake, yet expect that same slice will be in the fridge for a midnight snack.
People mostly come about their identities long before they learn enough about the world to have an informed perspective about it.
Is this a dim view of humans; Americans, in particular? I suppose. Is it completely correct? Perhaps yes; probably no.
But I doubt it is entirely incorrect.
@Rob1:
I don’t believe the ignorance is new. I think social media amplifies it. Empty G would never get this level of attention in the past. Ron Paul was a nuisance. Not a party leader.
Communist states like China, and the late unlamented Soviet Union, being so well known for their social liberality, emphasis on individualistic self-determination, and sexual permissiveness.
/sarc
@Rob1: It is hard to say if the absolute number of these types is unique at the moment. But their importance to their party is something I cannot recall. MTG’s importance alone, is something else.
@Kurtz: Certainly, I believe the story that I told about the young lady not to be unusual, but actually to be pretty much representative of people’s knowledge of politics and political theory. It’s just that when I quote the two most famous lines from the communist manifesto, I would expect a communist to recognize them. I would also agree that Communism has evolved since the days of Marx and Engels.
Most people truly don’t have developed sense of political theory, and I would consider Americans to be more guilty of this than Europeans as a whole. And a lot of the self-identification, as I think you noted, is fairly shallow. Such as being a republican, or a democrat, without really thinking too deeply about what that actually means philosophically.
Personally, I’ve always considered myself to be a political conservative. At least, since my time in college and participation with the College Republicans and Young Americans for Freedom. I voted for every Republican presidential candidate from Reagan through Romney. I couldn’t bring myself to vote for Trump, on a number of levels, including that he isn’t really a conservative in my viewpoint, so I voted independent or third-party in the last three elections.
But for most Americans, it’s simply whether the candidate has an R or a D beside the name.
@Kurtz:
We deserve it.
@Rob Robinson:
What state?
I completely get being in a safe state and not liking either option, realizing your vote doesn’t matter and casting a message vote, even knowing the message is lost.
But in a swing state… that’s a different story.
Between the people who voted for Trump, and the people who didn’t bother to vote, and the tiny insignificant sliver who voted third party, I am slightly appalled that roughly 2/3rds of the country was either in favor of a second Trump presidency (now promising fascism!) or at least indifferent towards it.
ETA: My father has been voting third party and it’s all my fault. He was really upset that he was either going to have to vote for a Democrat or Trump, and I pointed out that his vote for pretty much anything didn’t matter and had never mattered since he lived in a very blue district in New York State. I was trying to be mean, but he found this freeing. It backfired so bad. It was awful.
@Gustopher: I live in Virginia, which is essentially a purple state, although definitely more democratic on the national side lately. But frankly, my conscience would not allow me to vote for Trump, nor for the Democratic options in the last three presidential elections. Hence, the independent and third party votes.
@Steven L. Taylor:
Wow.
Maxine Waters didn’t make the list?
@Rob Robinson:
Well, may not agree on much otherwise, but, hey, we got one thing!
@Gustopher: Trust me on this, as a “conservative” who voted 3rd party since Reagan.* Your dad was never going to vote for a Democrat. Breathe easy.
*And stopped altogether when I realized I was not going to be able to find a Democrat I would support when Clinton “smoked but didn’t inhale.”
@just nutha: Not that he would ever get the Democratic nomination, but as a conservative who voted for every Republican presidential nominee from Reagan through Romney, I would’ve voted for Joe Manchin over Trump.
@Connor: In much the same way that Empty G (I really LIKE this nickname, I wish I’d thought of it) and “Senator Coach” are not offensive to you, Maxine Waters is not offensive to me. The difference is what has convinced me (in my dotage) that the rift between left and right in Murka to too great to be bridged. I can only hope that the leaders of the future will be wiser than the leaders of 1860 but have no confidence that they will be.
@Rob Robinson: While I understand your point (literally anyone is a better candidate than Trump) I see no point in choosing a political hack beholden to special interests over a non-political hack beholden only to his own appetites and greed. But I gave up both “less worse” choices and empty messaging via the ballot box for lent 25 or so years ago.
Since then, I’ve returned to my Baptist upbringing and given up self-denial every year.
@Connor:
Desperate to be here, but terrified someone might ask him a question on the economy, the World’s Greatest Businessman appears, to add his nothing to the conversation.
@Connor:
You’re surprised? Unlike Trump supporters, Steven Taylor is a (temperamental, if no longer functional/political) conservative who has retained his decency and basic integrity. Unlike you, he is not the type of pathetic, unpatriotic, pathologically dishonest white dude who reflexively denigrates educated, accomplished black ladies while lapping up slavishly behind incompetent, unqualified, mediocre white men:
– Donald Trump, Epstein-bestie rapist, pedophile and felon
– Matt Gaetz, sex-trafficking crackhead wearing cheap, botched plastic surgery
– Pete Hegseth, wife-beating drunk turned author of the most clumsy national security breach in memory
– JD Vance, sellout cuck
– RFK Jr., brain-wormed heroin addict
– Elon Musk, drug addicted Nazi nepo baby
Etc etc.
@Michael Reynolds: Let’s be fair, he didn’t add his nothing, he added his misogyny and/or racism.
Maxine Waters? Really.
John Hickenlooper went to see Deep Throat with his mom, and yet Republicans can only focus on women and minorities. Most of the Democrats in congress are white men, but they’re almost never the ones that grab the Republican imagination. Statistically, some of them are going to be boneheads.
@CSK: Generally speaking, many don’t seem to understand the concept of foundation garments, either.
@Just nutha ignint cracker: Give up self-denial every Lent? Funny!
@Gustopher: If they want to name a dumb black Democrat, then Hank Johnson is sitting right there. I have several family members in his district, and my parents once went to the sane church as he did. All are underwhelmed, to put it mildly. I believe “dim bulb” was the descriptor my dad used.
The Georgia congressional delegation runs the gamut of brightness, from A to Z.
Just when I’d given y’all up as victims of MAGA censorship, you reappear in my Feedly with 14 posts all dated March 28. I’m pleased; losing both OTB and Kevin Drum in the space of a few weeks would have left a ‘rational long-form blogger’ hole in my daily reading.
The communist accusation was serious through much of the 20th century. The USSR did intend to spread its governing ideology over the world, and it required violent revolution or war to be adopted. Offhand, I can’t think of a single country that adopted communism without a revolution, civil war, or had it imposed through occupation (ie eastern Europe).
Moreover, the Soviets both offered support to communist parties in many countries, and was a heavily armed, dangerous rival of the Western order. Naturally they recruited spies in the US, many of whom were communist sympathizers. it was very hard to support communism and oppose the USSR.
Since the collapse of the latter in the 90s, all such concerns should have gone away. China had changed to state capitalism (or whatever they call it; it’s certainly not communism*) even earlier, and that was that for the communist powers.
All this assumes a rational view of the world and interpretation of events. Whatever the late Republican party is, it’s no longer rational or even much beholden to reality.
But this goes back a long way. Needless to say, many democrats were smeared as communists by extremist Republicans (the forebears of today’s mainstream Republiqans). But so were radical lefty Republican politicos like Eisenhower.
It made no sense then. It makes no sense now. But the epithet serves as a substitute for argument: Yeah, we may be fascists and we may be destroying government and the rule of law, but they are COMMUNISTS!!11!!!1
J
For “Jewish space lasers”
@Michael Reynolds: Can’t sell off’n an empty truck. (And old proverb from my first employer )
@Michael Reynolds: Can’t sell off’n an empty truck. (And old proverb from my first employer )
@Gustopher: “John Hickenlooper went to see Deep Throat with his mom, and yet Republicans can only focus on women and minorities”
I certainly don’t disagree with your broader point, but wow I don’t have a clue what this sentence is about!
There is a certain irony in the re-use of the word.
Ask a conservative why Communism is bad and they will give you a list of all that’s happening in Trump’s America right now.
“Whaaat? The secret police could just whisk you off the street and send you to a faraway prison without charges or trial? And the government would punish any institution which dared to speak out against it? And the government would just control prices by fiat? And the legislature would just rubber stamp whatever the Boss told them?
That’s all just so crazy, man!”
@Daryl:
No no, he just opposes everyone who opposes Trump. See the difference? No? What’s wrong with you?