[MD] Newspeak, Plainspeak

[Arlo Bensinger]

Platt,

I'm saddened you took this as another opportunity to do nothing more than 
trumpet party propaganda, and engage in yet more Wurlitzers. My post was 
not condemning of the right, any more than it was condemning of the left. 
But, as a Party Jester, any and all questioning of the Party Line must be 
met with your typical Fear-Distort-Wurlitzer, that says nothing to the 
content of my post, but serves only keep up your unabashed distortion of 
everything to support your party. Pity.

[Platt]
My mention of George Orwell had nothing to do with Orwell's politics but 
with his anti-intellectualism, as I made clear to any unbiased reader by my 
quoting this recent excerpt from an article in Times Online: [snip]

Does the Marxist critical thinker agree with Orwell about intellectuals? 
Does he even agree with what Pirsig said about intellectuals? "They had 
everything figured out. That was part of the problem." I  doubt if an 
answer will be forthcoming, any more than he can admit the fact that 
left-wingers dominate the faculty of colleges and universities.

[Arlo]
First, that "left-wingers dominate" is nothing but a propagandic Wurlitzer. 
I realize you hope that if you keep repeating it over and over, along with 
your subsequent "lefitst media" nonsense, people will buy it. It's the 
Limbaugh way, and I'd expect nothing more for someone who has shown that 
this is really all they are interested in. I've presented my own 
experience, which you dismiss as "biased and unreliable", I've presented 
evidence of the collusion in funding carried out by conservative "think" 
tanks demonstrating the warping and distortion of your so-called "facts". 
But your response is only with more Wurlitzers and "fear" of the Great Vast 
Liberal Conspiracy.

As for "intellectuals", well I think there are many, both "college 
professors" and "conservative commentators" who are full of bunk, 
interested in nothing more than distorting a dialogue to serve whatever 
Party they Jester for. But, you see, Pirsig was (is) an "intellectual". 
Your Hayek was an intellectual. So making a blanket condemnation of 
"intellectuals" is really just distortive dialogue, again, useful to 
further your Party Agenda, but offering little in actual substance. So, 
yes, many "academic intellectuals" are full of convoluted and twisted 
wihio-speak. But so are right-wing radio talk show hosts.

In my post, and in yesterdays, I fully supported your condemnation of 
"Newspeak" as it relates to the Party Jesters of the left. But you are a 
fool, if I can be so bold, if you want to pretend that the right is not as 
guilty. From "feminazi" to "The Patriot Act", the right has engaged in just 
as much distortive Newspeak as the left. And yes, twice now (this makes 
three) I've agreed with you on the media's use of Newspeak in discussing 
not only illegal immigration, but terrorist attacks. And yet you have the 
gall to claim "the Marxist critical thinker ignores that". Rather than face 
the valid criticism, and intent, of my post, that BOTH political parties 
and ALL Party Jesters use Newspeak, fork-tongued speech, rather than the 
Plains Spoken language of the Indians, you choose to respond with only 
party rhetoric, I find this sad.

So, Platt, you can continue, as I'm sure you will, warping and distorting 
everything said that in even the slightest way challenges your Noble 
Conservative, Evil Liberal nonsense. You can ignore your own Party's 
Newspeak and instead write fear-based nonsense like "Marxists with guns". 
But, all you do is prove my point. One does not have to be a "college 
professor" to be wihio, as you so vividly demonstrate. No wonder why you 
refuse to accept Pirsig's appraisal of the Indians.

As for you final note, yes, we "are growing increasingly tired of their 
hypocritical moralizing, endless fear-mongering", both from the left AND 
the right.

Arlo