Scott McLemee, noted art and culture critic, shall now face an existential question offered up from “Leaterstocking”, noted Larouchian wikipedia Sock Puppet. If there is no wikipedia article devoted to you, do you exist? On March 26, 2009, as seen in a not easily link-specified place here:
The fact that there is no article about McLemee suggests that he may not be notable enough to be mentioned as a critic. Perhaps you ought to author an article about him if you disagree. But regardless, how does being an “award winning book critic” qualify him to offer criticism of political groups?
The perfunctory search engine search suggests that devotees to Carrol Quigley (good overlap there), Thomas Pynchon, Christopher Phelps, and the Spartacist League do not have this same problem with the matter of Scott McLemee’s existence. But trimming Scott McLemee from the entry is key to Leatherstocking’s sense of balance:
I removed the neutrality tag, because I was satisfied that the article had been returned to a balanced state, but I see that Will Beback has tilted it once more toward his team’s POV.
“Neutrality tag” removed with the “clean editing job” (in the eyes of this Larouchian sock puppet) during the time that “Will Beback” was on vacation. I bet Scott McLemee didn’t even realize he was on a team. The LYM as a wikipedia entry poses the probelm that nobody much is paying attention much — there is another struggle to get a couple of dead-link college newspaper articles off, key in that the college environ is the primary place the LYM has a presence enough for anyone to care to demand an article. Remove such and we are left with the only focal point that takes the LYM seriously at face value:
Remember that in Reliable Sources it says that fringey sources should be used only as sources about themselves and in articles about themselves or their activities. Thus, LaRouche sources may be used in this article, just as your writings would be appropriate in the article Dennis King. If the material is clearly attributed, the reader can judge its credibility.
But noted cultural and art citics have been removed from the discussion. (Incidentally, Scott McLemee ceased a “Fringe Watch” on his blog, apparently answering the age old question “What is the role of a critic in a society?” with “Not to spend an undue amount of time commenting on perhaps fascinating, but largely irrelevant political sects.”)
I do not think the LYM warrants a wikipedia page. In a better world, one where wikipedia editors don’t feel the need to bargain with participants of an elaborate playground mimicry of Mission Impossible shows, this LYM article would be surmised by the sentiments expressed with the Avi Klein citation, perhaps with some citation to some Larouche pronouncments, and perhaps with the items concerning Jason Ross (and there might be two too many “perhaps”es there)– and then tucked firmly into the wikipedia article on the “Larouche Movement”. As is, the first thing we learn about the LYM on the wikipedia article is that their “war-room” is located in Leesburg — a fact that in its proper context is filed under “LYM planned as instrument to outlast Larouche”.
I have two problems with this British “Channel 4″ news report on the “Justice for Jeremiah” Wiesbedan trek:
#1: skip to the 2:42 mark and wait for the phrase “with views seen by many as anti-Semitic and anti-British“. I suppose we haggle a tad with “anti-Semitic” and its role, and just what it is to reference a Locust here or there, but I’m wondering who views his call for War Against Great Britain as not being “anti-British”. (Well, theoretically those who schlep that completely over to the “anti-semitic code language”, I guess — notably some posters at the neo-nazi “Storm Front” board.)
#2, and a wee bit more important, and this is something I harp on a bit: Skip to 3:42, “On their website, however, they expressed”. For the love of god, if you’re going to report on what they expressed on their website, please expand your purview from that narrow line and mention the broader conspiracy it finds that the Duggans have been a part of Tony Blair and Dick Cheney’s goal to destroy Larouche. (At the very minimum.)
And now it’s time for The “Howie G” Show. First a few of the loopier comments he posted to former member “European”‘s blog:
You should celebrate satanic culture, since you’re a satanist. You’re obviously totally shameless. All Lyndon tried to do is take away your right to call your banal and stupid “music” beautiful and creative. That’s enough to make you kill.Since you only consider the erotic to be valid, that obviously ruins your “trip.”
Seems to be a couple of lines of inquiry. Notice the brand new Larouche sock puppet at wi:kipedia (brand new, that is, unless it’s the nineteenth or thereabouts iteration of the figure who originally went by the Simpsons reference “Herschel Kurstofsky”) at Dennis King:
Not much biographical information in this article. He published a book in 1995 — anything since then? What does he do for a living? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Coleacanth
Colecanth, eh? I don’t much know the answer. Doesn’t Larouche have a line on that? Something about Drug Money or something?
Which brings us to the next Howie G blog entry… for the life of me, I don’t see what from the LPAC link to a London Times piece I’m supposed to view as troubling regarding George Soros. But if finding some sense of adventure from fleeing the Nazis excites “Howie G” , so be it.. There is a tinge of “huh” with this statement:
continues his anti-human tradition, by literally pushing drugs.
I suppose I advocate legalizing two things I’m not going to take advantage of: gay marriage and marijuana. The latter is so anti-human that this. (Then again, that would have had to have been during an Aristotlean Dark Ages Epoch.)
Ironic, as I posted the list of evil conspirators gleaned from the essay “A Defense of Poetry” to a message board I frequent I had the response:
Uhh…errr…I can only assume the author was on a major drug trip whem he wrote that little jem. Or how does that old saying go?…
‘psychotics build imaginary houses and neurotics live in them.’
Some fascinating discourse on a Larouche speech found in the comments section here. I guess this is what a Platonic dialouge in Leesburg would sound like?
IFUCKUBITCh says: yea if we can all work together, we can destroy UK. If we fall into UK’s trap and keep fighting each other, UK is going to gain even more influence.
The gameplan: nope UK & US will start the war, US will lose ground and then betray UK, US & Russia with send all their nuke to UK at the same time and end the war.
Load1Bongs1Not1Guns chimes in to put this man in his proper credentials: That man is a former presidental canidate, and you are watching celebrities.
Calebsaccount defends the British: your a ing hole dude, britians one of the best countries and arnt evil they are trying constantly to help the usa end what will soon be world war 3
Habs1009 lays out his view: world war 3 will start with a coalilation led by russia ft islam nations, ethiopia, turkey vs israel. it will be thwarted by jesus christ. another war will happen7 years later. all the nations led by the antichrist except for russia, china, india, japan, and north korea. the antichrists forces will beat russia the march on israel, after that the asians 200 plus million man army. they will all die
To put a spin on an old saying, “‘psychotics build imaginary houses and psychotics live in them.” Sometimes.
Like posting to an article from Adolf Hitler about vegetarianism.
A good friend sent me the link to this well produced video that makes some excellent points. I am fully aware that the source of this video may call into question its veracity, but I have been doing a lot of research for the past year or so and have come to the conclusion that FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) has been spread about LaRouche as well as about nuclear power.
Hm. Note to the Org: Here’s a good contact for funding!
Meanwhile, another good source for the Larouche organization might to roll down is the list of commenters at this Alex Jones article. They’ve tapped the same conspiratorial veins. (But I guess they’d have to remove Obama from the equation in contact… for the moment?)
Though we’ll run into this from the “Science Movement” quadrant:
I also learned that British royalty is an elaborate front for the opium trade, and many other things my education and common sense had led me to embrace falsehoods.
Lindon, bless your heart, your village called, seems they want thier idiot back.
When Joshua Micah Marshall expanded his blog to this community type thing, I don’t think he had in mind providing a forum for Larouchies to peddle their propanda. And so the question:
Admin question. How does this diary with no recs make the rec list?
An interesting answer is proferred. LaRouche is all powerful.
I actually accidentally provided one of these diary entries with a “recommendation”, making one recommendation two, thinking I would be able to deign who the heck recommended it by clicking. Alas — I’m part of the problem.
This comment is the Comment on the Century!:
The Oligarchs and their low life lackeys are feeling the heat, eh, and you L.M. do not like that because laRouche is so very effective in rallying real patriots from around the globe against them? Tell the truth who do you work for? Bring forward your notable champion of vice and debate laRouche concerning the last 50 yrs. of current history as to what really happened to our nation and the world! Who has the balls to come forward? Your half-truths are bullshit, good to cover your own ass, but a slippery slope to hell for anyone who falls for it! For daring to speak truth to the unspeakable powers, thus unmasking these evil untouchables and their world class criminal tools, traitors, and fools, the fearless folk hero and true American patriot, Lyndon LaRouche was railroaded. Many of those same enemies of LaRouche and of our nation today, still remain protected by the opinion makers of the opinion makers above the law. He was in fact an American political prisoner of George H. W. Bush.! Unlike you and your fiends, LaRouche is the only living economist on the planet, who was always right! LaRouche’s ideas concretized as policy of the United States would save this republic, and the enemies of this nation do not want the nation state to survive under Globalization(Empire). What is needed now is an all-out mobilization to ensure LaRouche’s plan goes into effect—and that those who seek to block it are removed from power. If we would have listened to LaRouche the world would not now have come to endless bailouts and the brink of a new dark age.
Huh.Are you sure you’re not Webster Tarpley?
Anyway — attention Joshua Micha Marshall: dailykos can immediately delete these things when they eke into his “diary” community, why can’t you?