QuickSpec- Annoyingly Self-Referential Edition

Written by


  1. mike  

    my internet is fucked.

  2. idea  

    I'm going to try to propose a "Apolitical Awareness Week." During this week, everyone at Columbia will have to be aware of the joys of being mostly apolitical. These joys include (but are not limited to) going to class without being yelled at by some political group on college walk.

  3. Chirs Kulwalik  

    is a heartthrob!

  4. who

    thought that these constant video game reviews were a good idea?

  5. seas  

    esc has two events happening tonight and there is a new policy in seas that was just released...slower yes, but at least something is being done...

  6. cmon bwog  

    columbia football doesn't suck. it was a close game against a good team (Dartmouth beat Penn last week) - a little luck & it would've gone the other way. and it's certainly a hell of an improvement over penn last week. give em a little more time and i think they'll pull through

  7. yeah

    Dan Okin would've gotten that out faster. Of course he would have published it alone and been as asshole. But hey, can't get everything!

  8. Assapopoulos  

    "To this day, few Americans understand communism for what it was: simultaneously the greatest threat to a free and God-fearing West and history's most prolific human rights abuser."

    Koala is incredible! I could swear he believes this shit! Pass the grain alcohol and rainwater, Mandrake! Protect our precious bodily fluids! Don't drink the Kool-Aid!..actually that's a good name for his column..."Koala's Kool-Aid." Wooohoooo!

  9. the problem is  

    that Kulawik and Horowtiz are just plain wrong. While the countries they label "Islamo-Fascist" might be repressive or totalitarian, they are not fascist. Fascist regimes are characterized not only by their authoritarian nature, but by their economic organization. To my knowledge, none of the so-called Islamo-Fascist nations is organized along the lines of Mussolini's Italy, Imperial Japan, or Franco's Spain. Fascist has just become a misnomer and a slur. I'm not defending fascists or "Islamo-Fascists" - I just think that Horowitz and the rest of the crowd should be more precise and not throw around words that have certain (albeit, intended) perjorative connotations.

  10. What's so funny  

    ...is that people on the right and left both use the term fascist incorrectly. Love it.

  11. except  

    that I'm not...

    Look at Alan Milward's War, Economy, and Society. In it, he argues that the fundamental goal of German Nazism, Italian Facism, and Japanese Facism were to create economic autarky. In economic terms, the Germans wanted to control the raw materials, the means of production, and the final markets. In order to do so, they had to expand into the Ukraine, France, Bohemia, etc. Facism is characterized by a kind of capitalist imperialism. Hitchen's article you linked to makes some reference to bin Laden's movement having qualities of a rogue coropration - but he is missing the point. Links to finance doesn't equate a rigid control of markets and economic autarky. Sure, bin Laden might envisage some revived caliphate just as Hitler saw the rebirth of the Reich, but in the end, empire as such wasn't the goal of the Nazi's - it was economic independence.

    Of course, Hitchens often misses the point - he's a neocon hack and a traitor to the left, just like Horowitz.

    • except that you are

      You can't just claim as a sleight of hand that 'links to finance' doesn't equal rigid control when the entire goal of these extremists is to create a world sharia state which precisely would have rigid control over the economy (the fact that fascists haven't succeeded doesn't make them any less fascist)---imagine a thousand fold move towards islamic concepts of morality in finance (as a matter of fact, one of the lesser known things about Al-Sadr is that he's one of the driving intellectual forces behind this islamic system
      of finance and economics) such as nisab, jizya, khum or concepts of interest etc taking hold of an islamic global state.

      Just because you want to restrict fascism to the way in which it was used by those who associated with corporatism doesn't all of a sudden invalidate the fact that the term has a wider reach in the way it has been used.
      In fact there have been a number of ways in which fascism has been defined along with the mussolini inspired one. You're being brutally dishonest to just take Milward's constrictive argument as fact. Can I do that with Marinetti's artistic definition, or Gentile's definition? I mean, you've got to be just plain stupid if you can't recognize that some of the precursor thinkers and originators of the term and idea had more highly developed artistic and literature based definitions or meanings ascribed to the term.

      Not to mention that Milward's definition and your sycophantic attitude towards it also display an inability to look at it critically---yes mussolini instituted high tariffs against most of the world, but they were just that, tariffs that restricted but didn't shut off trade -- would you suggest that for example india was moving towards an autarky and fascism until the 90's--surely tariffs/autarky are not the end all to this defintion? This of course ignores the fact that these tariffs weren't even in place for allies of mussolini like Germany-- so the entire argument is incredibly flawed. Wow, tariffing your enemies and free trade with your allies? That certainly doesn't constitute autarky. On top of that expansion to create final markets is precisely a side effect of creating some global state based upon an ideology which governs everything including economics---but hey you only want to score politicial points so you don't care.

      Prof. Paxton right here at good ol CU also has expounded another one of the popular and far reaching definitions of fascism:

      "Fascism may be defined as a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victim-hood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion."

      There's nothing to suggest that paxton's definition isn't as valid. Now there's certainly debate over the value of the term anymore as its definition and application has expanded and has been used in many ways (including as a political epithet), however trying to just chide away all those who use it in another way as 'neo cons' suggests that you're guilty of a type of elitist semantic snobbery which is unduly influenced by your political beliefs.

      This is particularly true in this case where your apparent fixation on the improper misuse of the term is incredibly shortsighted considering islamo-authoritarianism, etc. would miss out on some crucial elements in these extreme movements that those who use this term wish to highlight. Then again, for somebody who wishes to discredit an argument by making an ad hom and then admonishing apparently anyone who's a
      'traitor to the left' or a 'neocon hack' (show me a human rights activist who isn't a neocon hack by the way) i guess your weak argument that's riddled with so many flaws is just par for course.

© 2006-2015 Blue and White Publishing Inc.