I think it's more like hijack and undermine the emotive meaning of "liberal."

I don't disagree with your i). It's the source for all kinds of pointless detail-chopping in some philosophy, after all.

But B is right in i). This isn't what Goldberg is doing. He's not dealing with a borderline case. He's outright lying, and trying to define something that's not within the class at all as part of a propagandistic effort to smear his political opponents.

A reminder to DC-area folks that Goldberg will be appearing live! in person! tomorrow evening, at 6:30, at the L St. Borders. The temptation to live-troll, or at least rubberneck (I can't imagine the crowd will be well-disposed), is strong.

I agree with 2, actually; I meant to include an asterisk about how the presence of marginal cases doesn't mean there are no clear cases of incorrect applications, and the book surely provides an example.

I'm planning to be there. Anyone have any good legitimate-seeming trolling questions for me to ask?

3: It would be awesome if everybody could show up with copies of Dragons: Lexicon Triumvirate for him to autograph.

I assume people will just call him doughy pantload or fuckwad and then chortle.

Throw Cheetohs! See if he catches them in his mouth!

When did it become acceptable or useful to make fun of morally reprehensible idiots for being fat?

It's been acceptable forever, sadly. Also, Ogged totally encourages it. So counterproductive.

re: 10

Yeah, he's a skinny man who fears he may one day again be fat. So he hates what he may become.

Like guys with full heads of hair mocking the bald.

It isn't that Goldberg is fat, it's that he's doughy.

10: Yes, but the villain on our side in this is Al Franken --http://www.amazon.com/Rush-Limbaugh-Big-Fat-Idiot/dp/0141018410/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1200331003&sr=1-1

Like guys with full heads of hair mocking the bald.

God knows how to deal with that one.

Anyone have any good legitimate-seeming trolling questions for me to ask?

"Who's a bigger fascist--James Kirk or Jean-Luc Picard?"

re: 14

Damn right. [You can imagine a Samuel L. Jackson voice here]

I would really like someone to ask Goldberg what's so bad about fascism, anyway. His employers at National Review have been defending fascists from the beginning, including Eichmann and Franco most prominently. Does he think they were wrong to do so? If so, has he informed them of this long-running error? It needs some polishing to be concise enough, but I really think it's the key question. Liberals and leftists have our reasons for opposing fascism, but it seems to me that the conservative movement's only gripe against fascism has ever been the occasional direct clash of national interests.

I think, "So what's so bad about fascism?" would be a great question, even without the National Review aspect.

I assume Picard would be more fascist, given the New Age mumbo-jumbo of early TNG.

14. God knows how to deal with that one.

Them crazy, them crazy
We gonna chase those crazy
Baldheads out of town
Chase those crazy baldheads
Out of town

Actually, when pressed on his nonsensical definition of fascism, he actually tries to argue that not all fascism is bad, so that tack wouldn't work. Read the Salon interview. It's pretty softball, but simply because the interviewer knows what he's talking about and Jonah doesn't, the doughy pantload ends up digging himself an enormous whole. Best quote comes when Jonah admits/claims that despite writing a book about how Mussolini was really a lefty, he doesn't have a clue what he's talking about.

You've talked about Mussolini remaining on the left and remaining a socialist, and in your book you've got a lot of quotes from the 1920s about that, but I'm wondering -- how does that fit in with what he wrote and said later, especially "The Doctrine of Fascism" in 1932?

I'd need to know specifically what he wrote in "The Doctrine of Fascism." It's been about three years since I've read it.

Anyone have any good legitimate-seeming trolling questions for me to ask?

Sadly, No!'s analysis of the Salon interview with Jonah is required background reading. (Via apo.)

(Viva apo!)

15 gets it right.

So he's stuck in this largely pointless historical project as an attempt to hijack or at least undermine the "emotive meaning" of the term "fascism."

so yes, he's a disingenuous hack.

I am assuming that people agree that Goldberg does not take his own argument very seriously. I think the primary motivation for the book (beyond the purely commercial one) was attempted inoculation of the right against the fascism charge. So he had to find arguments that were just credible enough and not on the surface self-defeating to get the airplay and column space in the Imperial Media. So, yes he cannot go to some arguments that would blowback onto the Right (especially in interviews, the book not so much).

21: Yes, Sir Kraab! Also to be found there is the wholly delightful and surely accurate reason why Goldberg seems confused about the name of Oswald's group. He calls them the Silver Shirts. The y were, of course, the Black Shirts. Someone then realized that in some super nerdly alternative history series they are called the Silver Shirts. Ecce, Jonah's research.

Oswald Mosley, I mean. We're on a first name basis. The Mitford sisters introduced me.

23, yes. The Sadly, No link really is incredibly excellent.

25: God, how embarrassing. I really am almost embarrassed for the man.

Hey cleek, check the Jetsons thread for an answer to your wireless speaker question.

||

Food review bleg:
Local Italian restaurant has something called "long sauce" as its house sauce. Sort of a slightly chunky, slightly creamed marinara. Google hasn't heard of it (their menu is the #1 link). Has anyone here ever heard of such a thing?

|>

Maybe 'long' is for 'long cooked' or something -- distinguishing a 'simmer for three days' ragu from a 'throw some tomatoes in a pot with whatever and serve an hour later'? But I'm making it up.

My first hit is to Google Books: An American Glossary, by Richard Hopwood Thornton, 1912. It's an index entry that reads: Sauce, Sarce, Sass. Vegetables. See also LONG SAUCE.

Long sauce reference from the early 19th century.

Weird: "A quantity of long, short, and round sauce, or "sarse," i.e. carrots, turnips, and potatoes."

Has someone started compiling a list of straight factual errors in the book (a la 25) rather than abuse of concepts or misinterpretation of policies and events? A certain critical mass of factual errors would help weaken his case.

Also, oudemia is such a name dropper.

30-33: That could make sense; I could see it having the character of a long-simmered marinara. Thanks.

It's just so odd going to Google to learn more about something and seeing that something as the #1 hit (of just 52!).

Long sauce is a gravy derived from long pork.

I'm planning to be there. Anyone have any good legitimate-seeming trolling questions for me to ask?

1. Like all fascists, Liberals hate their nation. One way they of expressing their fascist anti-nationalism is by openly rejecting flag lapel pins. My question: Can a flag lapel pin be too large?

2. Your book compares Liberals to Mussolini and Hitler on its cover. Sean Hannity's book compares Liberals to terrorists on its cover. Are Liberals more like Hitler or terrorists?

3. Like all fascists, Liberals are tolerant. An example of this was made clear in the 2004 election, when John Kerry would let any riff-raff attend his rallies, especially when that fascist Springsteen performed. Non-fascist Bush, on the other hand, carefully selected his audiences. My question: The loyalty oaths that Bush supporters took at his rallies, can they be too long?

4. A lot of Liberals oppose the imprisoning of suspected terrorists without charging them with a crime or allowing them access to legal representation. Is their opposition to Bush Administration policies another example of Liberal Fascism?

5. Same deal with telecoms and Bush Administration spying on U.S. citizens.

37: Very nice.

37.2: Per Dinesh D'Souza, 9/11 was clearly a case of Americans getting caught in the middle of a doctrinal dispute between Liberal Fascists and Islamofascists. In the spirit of fair play, should not Liberal Fascists be formally declared enemies in the GWOT?

38.37.2: I thought we had been.

oudemia's info in 25 could not be true, because it would provide overwhelming evidence that God exists and loves me very much.

Also, it gives rise to the thought that in a nearby alternate universe, where Goldberg was a better and finer conservative slandermonger, he accidentally referenced the Black Shorts, rather than the Silver Shirts.

41: I would applaud his efforts, don't you know.

40: Go read it over on Sadly, No. He says it in an interview, I believe. Not the book. But, I mean, come the fuck on.

22: "Someone then realized that in some super nerdly alternative history series they are called the Silver Shirts. Ecce, Jonah's research."

40: "oudemia's info in 25 could not be true, because it would provide overwhelming evidence that God exists and loves me very much."

Why spend the vast amount of time to type "silver shirts" into google when one can just hit "post" here and type in vague false rumors instead?

Speaking of impugning bad research and writing habits.

Sort of a slightly chunky, slightly creamed marinara

FTR, "marinara" in the context of Italian cooking is a sauce with anchovies. Pasta or pizza alla marinara is topped with shellfish. Pasta with tomato sauce is pasta al pomodoro. [/cooking pedantry]

Whether or not some other Silver Shirts existed, referring to Mosley's Silver Shirts is just wrong, and suggests he's been doing his research in Harry Turtledove books rather than on Wikipedia like a conscientious young man making an argument that's never been made before with such detail or such care.

The Goldberg argument reminds me of the Lancet study or the race intelligence arguments. The implicit message of the liberal hysteria is "don't you understand we're smarter than you? That we have degrees, lots and lots of degrees? That you couldn't possibly understand this, even if we explained it to you v-e-r-y s-l-o-w-l-y?"

Oddly, I agree with almost every word of that.

45- Thank you- I've always thought that marinara suggests a fish sauce (marine, right?) and people tell me I'm dumb, marinara is just tomato sauce.

bjk trolling in 47? Ignoring pro/con arguments for condescension, the hysteria around both the Lancet studies and Goldbergs propaganda piece are present, but pretty clearly not coming out of liberal circles. The knee-jerk reaction to Lancet I was pretty much textbook hysteria, and it all came from hawkish conservative supporters, plus keyboard commandos, and other general bedwetters.

however, I think there is a pretty good argument to be made for stupidly condescending message, but that's a separate issue.

47: The implicit message of the liberal hysteria

Why are you using that word? I do not think it means what you think it means.

45: "Alla marinara," as far as I know, refers to "in the manner of sailors," that is, quick and cheap. It can have all sorts of things in it, or not, but the "marinara" bit doesn't necessitate seafood, I think.

OK. Giuliano Bugialli says this, "Fundamentally, alla marinara simply means to add tomatoes to the basic garlic and olive oil, aglio e olio. This must have originated sometime in the nineteenth century, when ripe tomatoes came to play a dominant role in Neapolitan cooking, before spreading north. In Italy, even pizza alla marinara still means only tomatoes, garlic, and oil. The phrase refers to sailors or to fishermen, and, like "alla pescatora," means made in a quick and simple way, with just the few ingredients available to them. Because this basic sauce became popular to use with mussels, clams, and pasta, some mistakenly think the phrase means "with seafood.""

52: Thanks for proving my point. Tell me what I meant to say, if you would.

Face it, Knecht -- you can't out pedant Bugialli on Italian food.

Golden apples of deadly nightshade.

50: he pretty much is a troll, yeah.

44: I just saw this now, so, yeah, what LizardBreath said. Yep, there sure was an American fascist movement called the Silver Shirts. But that's neither what I said Goldberg said, nor what Goldberg said. The reference to Mosley could not have been more clear. Research, I tells ya.

Is anyone here planning to read Doughy's book? I was picking up my semester book load the other day and saw the happy little Hitler smiley face, but at this point the thing has passed the "read it to dispute it" point into pure mockery, I would think. Is there anything to gain by attempting a read?

55: Thanks for proving my point.

Because of course, anyone who points out that you might have made a mistake is just trying to come over all Smart and stuff. Goddamned smarties with their smarts.

Tell me what I meant to say

Why, thanks for asking! You meant to say that I am a better cook, fighter, dancer, dresser, lover and thinker than you are, and also that you would like to buy me a pizza. With everything on it. Except anchovies.

55: I don't see how that proves your point. You've (conflated?) two issues in 47. I can make sense of one of them (condescension, although it's hardly the rule) but hysteria is completely misplaced, it seems to me.

Ridicule is entirely the appropriate response in certain circumstances. Viz.

Face it, Knecht -- you can't out pedant Bugialli on Italian food.

Oudemia, if you're going to come at me with argumentum ad verecundiam, you're going to have to find an authority I respect. Like google-fighting.

Try googling ricetta sugo marinara and then google ricetta sugo marinara -acciughe (i.e. without the word "anchovies").

Similarly, try ricetta "spaghetti alla marinara" and then the same search text with "-vongole -gamberi -calamari -polipetti -telline"

Jonah's book is #8 in the Amazon book sales. To all appearances, it's going to end up being a successful piece of propaganda, which simultaneously marginalizes liberalism and helps to immunize conservatism from getting called on being an authoritarian, anti-democratic, nationalist, militarist belief system that wants to mobilize the nation for permanent war.

I can't really laugh about it any more. I don't think I could go to his book thing tomorrow, the temptation to just start throwing things at the guy would be too great.

He works for the National Review, which has consistently supported Pinochet and Franco while consistently opposing Hilary Clinton. Stands to reason he'd write a book explaining why Hilary was the "facist" in that bunch.

Oh, it's propaganda all right, and probably will be successful to some degree. Hopefully not too much.

It was only ever funny in the `funny old world we live in sense' though --- it is a sad commentary on this country that a hatchet job like this book would get the sort of traction it gets. On the other hand, it's pretty much the same sad commentary that a second-rate mudslinger like Goldberg is payed as much attention as he is.

The implicit message of the liberal hysteria is "don't you understand we're smarter than you?

I actually think conservatives are smarter than liberals, in that they have a deeper understanding of effective propaganda techniques. Someone like Jonah Goldberg is far behind thinking of his thesis as "true" or "false", those categories just slow you down. He understands the way the thesis works as a piece of rhetoric -- for example, it appeals to that sense of whiny conservative victimization that seems to be felt by a lot of white men.

64: I think GB is making a finer distinction. The sauce has a name -- alla marinara. One can put that sauce on top of things, but it doesn't change the nature of the sauce.

But it is true that puttanesca is made from only the fanciest prostitutes!

68: Bugialli is the food historian, so I won't try to dispute the point he makes about the origins and history of the word. But in contemporary Italian usage, "sugo alla marinara" contains seafood: at minimum anchovies, and often other stuff as well. He is fighting a prescriptivist rear-guard action.

Anyway, I think that we can all agree that what gets identified as "marinara sauce" on American menus is known as "salsa di pomodoro" in Italy. There's just no two ways about that.

But it is true that puttanesca is made from only the fanciest prostitutes

A friend who is married to an Italian woman was visiting the in-laws, and they asked him what his favorite Italian dish was. He told them he liked penne all'arrabiata (arrabiata="furious"). As he tells the story, he learned the hard way that you have to pronounce both of the n-sounds in penne, otherwise it's the word for "penises". His in-laws got a kick out of his praise for "angry penises"

Goldberg is lucky he pulls this shit in the United States, a country which has been mostly sheltered from fascism and nazism, because had he written the same book over here, I don't think it would be verbal abuse he'd have to worry about.

And yes, if like the idiot in 47 you think that Goldberg has a point, you are either ignorant or (willfully) stupid. If the former, educate yourself, it isn't hard. If the latter, shut up about things you don't understand.

Words have meanings, fascism has a concrete history and denying this history is exactly like denying the Holocaust.

Gary, please do not comment on any forum in which I may accidentally read anything you have to say. Thank you.

Walt I can't figure out what fight you're trying to start here.

Man, I miss my blog.

Gary insulted me way back in 44, and I just noticed it.

Not so much, he insulted oudeima. While he was wrong to say that what she was saying was false, given that it wasn't false, and a busybody to reprimand her for lazy research, I can't really read that as aimed at you.

Another person too stupid to understand why Goldberg is wrong.

http://www.claremont.org/publications/pubid.407/pub_detail.asp

78: "The Claremont Institute: Providing a Secure Income for Washed Up Right-Wing Hacks Since 1979"

You're gonna have to do better than that, bjk. To be an effective troll, you have to actually recite part of the argument in the link. Of course, that might risk revealing how tendentious and ahistorical that argument is, but those are the risks you've gotta take when you're defending an ignoramus like Jonah Goldberg.

Even a troll such as myself hesitates to argue the origins of the holocaust in a comment thread. The argument is there if anyone cares to look at it.

67: The quick phrase for that is "big lie technique". And one thing you do if you use it is accuse your opponent of using the big lie technique! Beautifully elegant.

Goldberg's schtick is to seem intelligent and sensible in his manner and speech (what I call the NPR voice -- and Coulter fails on this one, pretty much). People who don't listen closely will grant him his point of view. He knows that he will not be challenged by the genteel, civil establishment NPR media, which has been neutered by a combination of neutrality-relativism and gangland intimidation. And he also knows that the people backing him will support anything he does unless he strays off the reservation.

So keeping a straight face and loyalty to the movement are his only tasks.

Considering that Leo Strauss was an anti-Nazi only by accident of birth, I'd think that people would be embarrassed to cite him. His 1932-1933 relationship with the actual Nazi Carl Schmitt reveals him to be a terribly confused and rather unpleasant fellow. He was specifically and explicitly anti-liberal, just like Schmitt -- and as far as that goes, Mao. Combat Liberalism!