Dear Editor:
In reading last week's letters, both signed and unsigned, I noted an incredible number of errors of fact and interpretation. I was dismayed to see that I had been unceremoniously demoted to "Lt. (j.g.)" (a rank that does not even exist in the United States Army) however, congratulations to Lt. Monroe for his promotion to "Major"! I always thought the Marines were capable of fighting their own battles but apparently that's not true on the local front. So be it.
Apparently I am not to be offended or insulted when I am called an anarchist but am to be castigated for referring to such charges as "naive and ignorant." For the record, I am not now nor have I ever been an anarchist nor have I played one on tv! I have never been nor would I be a member of any organization that was composed of anarchists or advocated anarchy. I will not be standing idly by when these canards and baseless charges are repeated since they are the antithesis of my political views. Any resemblance to any anarchist, living or dead, is purely coincidental or a deliberate concoction of a reader's demented imagination!
Also for the record, I did NOT call Lt/Major Norman ignorant; I said his hyperbole was naive and ignorant. Any attempt to equate the Tea Party movement with anarchy is indeed naive and ignorant, including the fanciful and farfetched suppositions of his surrogates. The first letter is a perfect example of predictable and pedantic extremist rhetoric filled with "harsh accusations, half-truths, and caustic criticism laced with racial overtones...that tyrants throughout history have used...to inspire national lunacy." The author should pull out his Psychology 101 text and reread the chapter on projection...seeing in others what they most dislike in themselves. Physician, heal thyself!
It is also oxymoronic and outright silly to impute anarchy to an organization whose opening phrase in its mission statement is "To support and defend our Constitution". Now if you can point to an article in our Constitution that advocates anarchy, you might have a semblance of logic in your argument. But you can't so you have to huff and puff and repeat the "radical extremist" motif over and over and over again. Let's not forget "astroturf", "corporate shill", "racist", and "mindless mob"! Talk about "antiphonal"! It does raise the question as to why an anarchist would frequent "neo-con and neo-fascist" websites since they are philosophically incompatible. But then, the dearth of logic is surpassed only by the dearth of proof.
It is all factually unsupported conjecture, hypothesis and implausible fantasy. However, that's the Alinsky rules. When you're caught in a lie, tell it louder and more often. Attack the messenger; never debate the message. By the way, the unsigned letter suggests I erred in referring to International Workers of the World as an example of an anarchist organization. The writer indicates it is "long defunct." Again, please do your homework. Just Google their name and you will immediately find their web page stating "Welcome to the International Workers of the World; the anarchosyndicalist trade union, worker's confederation and section of the Anarchist International." At the bottom of the page you will find extensive recaps of their May Day, 2010 activities. It hardly meets the definition of "defunct." I didn't say it had anything to do with President Obama. Also, Mr. Price, since I seldom ever watch Glen Beck (he's not my cup of tea!), the answer is "no." But thank you for your WW II service where all gave some and some gave all.
The final ruse is to trot out the old "It's all George Bush's fault!" shibboleth. Much of the economic success of the Clinton era was due to a Republican congress. Much of it was also due to a tech and housing bubble that had yet to burst. The economy was already stalling when George Bush took over. There were many fiscal conservatives complaining about the Bush administration's spending practices, his failure to veto Democratic spending bills, and TARP. To pretend that no one was saying anything back then is sophistry of the highest order. It's also selective amnesia to forget that the last budgets of the Bush era were from a Democrat congress and that Senator Obama voted for them. He helped drive the car into the ditch and still seems unable to find reverse! He is now quadrupling the deficit of the worst Bush year with his "spend our way into prosperity" government fiasco entirely on his own.
In summary, neither I nor my associates are anarchists and I will strongly oppose any effort to paint us as such. I will also reject and oppose any attempts to paint us as racist, xenophobic, homophobic, Nazi, fascist, mindless, corporate shill, astroturf or a mob. I will also actively oppose lies, innuendoes, slurs, and half truths whenever I see them. We'll see how it turns out if we ever get to a battle of ideas.
Sincerely,
William L. Garvin
No comments:
Post a Comment