Liberal Fascism by Jonah Goldburg

[sailaway21]

You read it here first. This is going to be the book that animates the spring and summer of this election year. Short reviews of the book as well as the author's blog, where he endeavors to debate the points raised can be found here:http://liberalfascism.nationalreview...RkYzdmYzA=&p=1

Recent events in Canada over "tolerance" and the Human Rights Commisions as well as on-going political events in these United States make the appearance of this history or modern liberalism most relevant. The only possible surprise is that Paul Johnson did not write it. If you're a student of history and still wonder what fascism, communism, and the practise of modern liberalism all have in common this may well be the book for you. Tom Wolfe thinks so.

[Valiente]

Jon Stewart took this guy to pieces this evening. I suspect Goldberg has some points worth exploring, but hyperbole and flawed rhetoric aren't the royal road to winning a debate. The only "points" (hey, it is a comedy show, after all) I found persuasive was that classical liberalism is pretty well dead.

Well, I knew that already. So is classical conservatism. That high-pitched whine is Edmund Burke spinning in his grave.

[RAGNAR]

zzz

[sailaway21]

Val,
If you click on the blog on NRO you'll see the misgivings about the comedy Central interview. It should be noted that this book is not an Ann Coulter in your face screed but more a history. The portions containing the connections between fascism and communism are as relevant, or more so, than the connections to modern liberalism. btw, the book is available at Amazon for around $15 and there's a heck of a debate going on over there amoung the usual suspects.

Rag's, the book also addresses the terms right and left in some detail, and how they've become perverted. I never knew that the term "right" had it's origins in Stalin's rejection of those not adhering to the party line of international communism.

Classic liberalism isn't dead, anymore than classic conservatism is. They're actually, for the most part, one and the same. Which might be one of the points to this book. I should have my copy fairly soon and I'll write more specifically.

[sailaway21]

This blog might give some better insights to the book than what may be gleaned from TV interviews.
http://philosoblog.blogspot.com/2008...en-people.html

[RAGNAR]

zzz

[sck5]

Actually, the terms right and left date from the seating pattern of delegates in France during the time of the French revolution. I would agree that their meaning has lost relevance today.

But JONAH GOLDBERG is an "intellectual"? He only has a job because his Mommy gave it to him. There are people with brains on the conservative side but this guy sure isnt one of them. All he has done with his book is come up with some memorable name-calling.

[xort]

"Jonah Goldberg is the first historian to detail the havoc this spin of all spins has played upon Western thought for the past 75 years, very much including the present moment. Love it or loathe it, "Liberal Fascism" is a book of intellectual history you won't be able to put down—-in either sense of the term.”
—Tom Wolfe, author of Bonfire of the Vanities and I Am Charlotte Simmons

I didn't realise Tom Wolfe was a lapdog for the vast right wing consipracy!

[RAGNAR]

zzzz

[sailaway21]

sck5,
Would you care to expand upon your knowledge of Mr. Goldberg's credentials? Or is the goal just to snipe at him due to his parentage and his mother's antipathy to the Clinton's?

Mr. Goldberg was hired by William F. Buckley to write for the National Review. Say what you will about conservatives, but Mr. Buckley is not in the habit of hiring less than stellar minds and writers. George Will, for one, got his start there. Lucy Goldberg's influence wouldn't get a prospective writer out of the mail room.

Since you're apparently the only one here who has read the book as yet, perhaps you could further expound on how it amount's to little more than "memorable name calling".