> Meanwhile the hyper-individualist-anarchists have decreed that even if Stewarts middle of the road-ish humour
> helps in some small way to set a US public mindset in opposition to Chavez criticising it is absolutely not
> allowed. Criticizing Chavez from a "wonderbreadish" perspective is deemed more than merely acceptable but is
> labelled "Brilliant" by these mutualists. This is not however a double standard even if it appears to be to the
> non-anarchist eye since Chavez is a tool of the left wing of capital and Stewart is a brilliant slightly left
> bourgeois TV personality.
Well, I'm not an individualist anarchist, so I have no idea who you are talking about. I've expressed my opinion and if you take that to apply to this mythical "hyper-individualist-anarchist" then you have mind-reading powers that Alex Jones would appreciate.
I find it sadly predictable that any criticism of a leftist world leader is pounded down by a few resident authoritarian leftists on this list. I'm sure that if I had said something critical of Chairman-for-life Castro I would be subject to the same kind of personal attacks.
It demonstrates the inherent weakness of your position that your attack me personally with stereotypes about anarchists.
> Chuck, you really have no idea what the term solidarity means do you?
Yes, I understand that solidarity with the Venezuelan people involves opposition to American imperialism and to the false hope of left-wing capitalism that Chavez represents.
>From a childish perspective it's all just a
> form of parental authority that must be opposed.
Oh no! I've been called a child!
John Boy continues with the personal insults in another message:
> Which is so obvious it makes ChuckO's ranting against Chavez and in support of Stewart's "Brilliant satire" all
> the more strange. It isn't as if anyone here called for Stewart's head on a plate, or was trying to implement a
> campaign to get him fired. It was a very mild criticism of Stewart which made ChuckO apoplectic. Is Stewart
> above criticism in ChuckO's opinion? Are politicians fair game but TV personalities off limits?
Did I ever say that I don't have criticisms of Jon Stewart?
The difference between us is that I understand that Stewart is a comedian, not some kind of threat to imperialism, Huge Chavez, or John Boy Thornton. If anything, I'd love to see Stewart be more critical of American imperialism AND Hugo Chavez.
> The criticism of Chavez was of a individual nature, his use of rhetoric which is all well and good to ChuckO but
> the criticism of Stewart was from a viewpoint of solidarity, something apparently to be opposed by hyper-
> individualistic anarchists.
Did you know that you have an infestation of hyper-individualistic anarchists under your bed?
Boo!
Chuck